Drug test machine used outside pubs and clubs

My initial instinct is that if they have to swab you, then they have to touch you and without suspicion and with intent, that is an assault.

I find this worrying. I am an optimist and believe in a caring and tolerant society. However, the point with drugs now is that the politicians are getting increasingly frantic and (most pertinently) using force as a result. Unnatural force. If traditional policing within given technologies does not work, then probably the crime should not be a crime, too many people are doing it and we aren't anywhere near battle of the cannibals. The government is inventing technology and invading our space to make us do what it wants. This bodes terribly for the next witch hunt they embark on, they will use technology to coerce us, not empower us. In other words, this New Labour government is Fascist.

If they're using the Vapor Tracer they don't have to swab. It picks up the "odor" as it's coming off you. The run it very close to you but don't have to touch you.

reply to post by Zaphod58


Yeah, thanks for that, fair point. It is still too invasive though. It is looking at your internal body makeup when there is no suspicion on you. They tried this with making it a crime to think a racist thought. It stinks of Gestapo like behaviour.

Jesus said 'It is not what goes into a man that defiles him, it is what comes out of a man that defiles him.' In relation to this drugs machine, if he is in heaven watching us, he must laugh at the irony of it.

I really can't go into details about how it detects, or what it's looking for, but I can say that it's NOT looking at anything internal. That's about the limit of what I CAN say about it.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
I really can't go into details about how it detects, or what it's looking for, but I can say that it's NOT looking at anything internal. That's about the limit of what I CAN say about it.

No, it's emmissions from the body, obviously, but that is an indirect way to determine what is in your body, which has sweet eff all to do with the state. The old law was about possession or supply, not having it in your body. They do the same with sniffer dogs I suppose, but very very misguided way of using science. My point is that I'm an optimist and want a government that is tolerant and shows a degree of care, of technology to empower us, not gradually shut our liberties down which the Labour murder machine seems intent on.

No, it's not off the BODY. That's all I can say. It does NOT detect off your body.

reply to post by Zaphod58


Well how does it detect you have it when it's not in your body?? Thoroughly confused.

It can't detect what's IN your body, or what comes OUT of your body if it's covered. There are other ways to detect but I can't say exactly. I'd like to tell you, but I had to sign an agreement that I wouldn't give out anything considered SSI, and how the system works is considered SSI.

Think about how it gets into your body.....

reply to post by Zaphod58


Mouth nose or veins? They're still part of your body. Obviously I'm missing something, but I will watch this with extreme interest. Thanks.

Soon your house doors will be locked from the outside and you will need to perform several tests in order to leave in the morning.

Sort of like a jail cell with a toaster and TV.

I personally think this war on drugs and the money spent on it is absurd, absurd for many reasons but primarily because prohibition doesn't work and in fact causes more problems of its own, we should learn from our joint history. Douglas Adams said it best:

Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so.

But that's going off topic slightly. So back to the original topic.

Originally posted by redled
My initial instinct is that if they have to swab you, then they have to touch you and without suspicion and with intent, that is an assault.

I would have thought this is correct. One thing I wonder about is if this is compulsory or not. If they are asking for permission in an indirect manner, making it sound compulsory when its not. This is not unheard of.

On the other hand you could argue that if they are using a system based on scent of some kind then this is not really any different than using Sniffer Dogs is it not?

The Upside

If you purchase one of these things yourself, you can run around your neighborhood at night and figure out who is getting high and introduce yourself the next day...

This image reminds of where all this "Nanny State" is really headed. This latest bit of news just unnerves me even more. Soon they will be inserting small tubes attached to such devices into our home through cracks and mailslots, doggy doors etc.




[edit on 3-11-2008 by TruthTellist]

to my knowlage the people were swabbed and checked,

(this was from bbc text, regional news service the day before)

for the record, their is probably no more to this than aberdeen city council wanting to make more money and fast, I am from aberdeen and worked many years with the council and seen how corrupt they can be.

for instance, their tried to ban all nightclubs in aberdeen form distributing any sorts of flyers (i also promoted small events as a hobby), this was so crazy, and was overturned within a month, they done it do they could fine clubs but it back fired as it means a load of people couldnt do their jobs as club promoters and was technicaly illegal (thats teh story that came from them anyway)

i wouldnt go with aberdeen city council turning into a complete big brother state just yet, the council is to stupid, although they did have tons of CCTV cameras ect long before other citys, they also pionered use of cameras with face recognition as well apparently.

with aberdeen city council its ALWAYS about money and making money, not about what they are doing good, random drug tests and the like are probably a really nice little money spinner.

[edit on 3-11-2008 by boaby_phet]

reply to post by Zaphod58
Hello Zaphod. I also worked with an explosives detecting thingamabob.
At the time it was called 'Flunky', however the code names for these search devices change often.

You are right. The damn thing would get hits from the whiff of a barmaids apron. I have no doubt these drug detectors are just as cr@p.

By the way, is the 58 in your name anything to do with 33, Purple Helmets etc?
If you have no Idea what I'm talking about, please forgive me.

You must have worked with the Barringer or the Ion Scan. Both of those are the biggest pieces of crap I've ever had to work on. The Itemiser on the other hand, as long as you kept up the maintenance on it was a great system.

The 58 was just random. Ages ago when I set up an email account Zaphod was taken, so it suggested a number and it just kinda stuck.

It Took me a while to find it, but here it is:
They have *no problem* identifying anything, even DNA:

Linked Here
Instant DNA Analysis on a Chip
University of Virginia professor James Landers has reduced an entire laboratory for DNA analysis to a chip the size of a common everyday microscope slide. What would be the usages for such a credit-card-sized-system? Such a device could be used in a doctor's office, for example, to quickly test for an array of infectious diseases, such as anthrax, avian flu or HIV, as well as for cancer or genetic defects. Because of the quick turnaround time, a patient would be able to wait only a short time onsite for a diagnosis. Appropriate treatment, if needed, could begin immediately. Currently, test tube-size fluid samples are sent to external labs for analysis, usually requiring a 24- to 48-hour wait for a result. However, when it involves an infectious disease such as meningitis, time is of the essence. Landers said. "We can greatly reduce that test time, and reduce the anxiety a patient experiences while waiting."
This DNA chip may allow physicians, crime scene investigators, pharmacists, even the general public, to quickly and inexpensively conduct DNA tests from almost anywhere, without need for a complex and expensive central laboratory. Landers said that with his a lab-on-a-chip, it takes just 30 minutes to do the work it would take three technicians and three instruments to complete in a week. It would also simplify genetic testing and the work of crime scene investigators. They could collect and analyze even a tiny sample of blood or semen on the scene, enter the finding into a genetic database, and possibly identify the perpetrator very shortly after a crime has occurred. Likewise, agricultural biotechnologists could do very rapid genetic analysis on thousands of hybrid plants that have desirable properties such as drought and disease resistance. Landers comments "we can now do lab work in volumes that are thousands of times smaller than would normally be used in a regular lab set-up, and can do it up to 100 times faster. As we improve our techniques and capabilities, the costs of fabricating these micro-analysis devices will drop enough to employ them routinely in a wide variety of settings."



[edit on 6-11-2008 by ATS4dummies]